[MD] Essentialism and the MOQ

[MarshaV]

At 06:53 AM 11/29/2006, SA wrote:

>     Marsha, what do you think of what I'm suggesting
>above?

Hi SA,

I think that Zen does not say 'ignore sq', but 'do not attach to sq'.

But, SA, I think too much and know very little.

Marsha



At 06:53 AM 11/29/2006, you wrote:



>      [Marsha]
> > Dynamic Quality is amoral is MU
> > Static Quality is moral is reality
>
>        [SA]
>      Marsha ya pulled through for me, thanks.  You
>made it simple, and plain-spoken.  This is also why
>MoQ is not totally western philosophy and not totally
>Zen.  Zen is dq in the above.  Western philosophy is
>totally sq in the above.  Pirsig states quality is
>both sq and dq.  This is how morals are significant,
>for sq and dq are Quality.
>      I've read that 99.9% of Zen practitioners in
>Eastern Asia, according to a Zen master, are not
>enlightened.  Thus, Zen says all is dq, but not all
>are enlightened, so, these Zen practitioners would
>have some sq, as well, but, Zen doesn't recognize sq
>as 'something' to live with.  Zen would recognize sq
>as 'something' to purge.  Yet, again, once sq is
>purged, sq patterns in Zen would appear as dq or
>emptiness.  Where the MoQ differs, is that the MoQ
>accepts sq patterns.  Those 99.9% unenlightened Zen
>practitioners are living 'something' in that
>unenlightened world of those.  Enlightenment is still
>a concept for them, one might say, since they are
>unenlightened still.  But Zen sticks to the 'All is
>dq', yet, not all Zen practitioners experience this
>'All is dq'.  So, in actual practice, one might say,
>Quality with sq and dq both being quality, takes
>actual experience of Zen and Western reality puts them
>together, in a way, that doesn't ignore the quality
>and real experience that both offer.
>
>     To highlight what I said:  Thus, one can practice
>Zen and notice dq, yet, ignore sq; but in the MoQ this
>Zen practice would also be aware of sq experience as
>'something' of quality, too.  One can practice western
>ways and notice sq, yet, ignore dq: but in the MoQ
>this western practice would also be aware of dq
>experience as 'something' of quality, too.
>
>     Marsha, what do you think of what I'm suggesting
>above?